Pronunciation models and accents in teaching

So far, the findings have suggested that the international position of English comes up mostly as concentration on intelligibility and as an introduction of different pronunciations in the teachers’ teaching. When asked how the global status of English comes up in their pronunciation teaching, some teachers mentioned that different pronunciation models come up alongside with other teaching materials and others mentioned that they intentionally introduce multiple varieties and discuss them with their students (see examples 26-28). In addition, some said that they introduce a variety of speakers from a tape to their students and ponder together with the students which accent the introduced speakers have and where are they from (see example 28-29).

Example 26:

Esim. Puhumme siitä, kuinka englanti kuulostaa erilaiselta eri puolilla maailmaa, miten esim. oma äidinkieli vaikuttaa puheeseen, kuuntelemme malleja (niin autenttisia sekä oppikirjojen materiaaleista löytyviä)

For example, we discuss how English sounds different around the world, how for example one’s own mother tongue affects the speech, we listen to models (both authentic and ones found in the textbook materials).

Example 27:

Esimerkiksi erilaisten videoiden kautta, joissa puhuu ei-natiivit kielenkäyttäjät

For example, through different kinds of videos where the non-native language users speak.

Example 28:

Katsotaan videoita eri maailmankolkista liittyen englannin kielen puhujiin/kulttuureihin ja monenlaisiin puhujiin

We watch videos related to English speakers/cultures and various kinds of speakers from around the world.

Example 29:

Joskus huomautan oppilaille äänitteistä, että pystyivätkö kertomaan mikä aksentti kyseessä ja mistä sen tunnistaa.

Sometimes I point out (an accent) from the recordings and ask whether students can tell which accent is in question and how it can be recognized.

Furthermore, some teachers consciously emphasize that there exists variation in pronunciation even within the native speakers. In doing so, teachers can help students to move past native-speakerism ideologies and realize how diverse English language is (Sharifian 2013: 9). When practicing pronunciation in their classes, many teachers pointed out that they wish their students to bravely try out new phonemes and engage in practicing speaking without the need of feeling embarrassed if pronouncing incorrectly:

Example 30:

Tärkeää myös, että oppilaat uskaltavat heittäytyä ääntämisharjoituksiin.

It is also important that students dare to engage in pronunciation exercises.

Example 31:

Tärkeää on myös ymmärtää, että taito karttuu vähitellen ja tärkeämpää kuin kaunis ääntämys on rohkeus puhua.

It is also important to understand that the skill accumulates gradually, and it is more important to have the bravery to speak than pronounce beautifully.

However, as most of the teachers participating in the study have received their education before the culmination point of EIL, it is not a surprise that most used pronunciation models they themselves use are British English (79%) and American English (48%). This can be observed from the Table 8. Some use also International English (15%), Australian English (13%), Canadian English (6%) and South-African English (2%). In addition, 13% stated that they use other models (Scottish English, New Zealand English, Irish English, and Indian English). It would be interesting to investigate further what the reasons behind the teachers’ answers are (e.g. do they switch between varieties for demonstration or other reasons). According to Tergujeff (2013: 51), who found similar results on the use of different varieties, the increased use of different pronunciation models implies that the demographic changes within speakers of English are acknowledged in teaching. In addition, it signifies a more accepting view towards accents.

Table 8: Question 9. Which pronunciation models do you use?

48%

Consequently, as presented in Table 9, the teachers teach their students mostly BrE (92%) and AmE (75%). Furthermore, International English is taught to some extent (15%) and AuE, which was included as an alternative pronunciation model in many of the textbooks the teachers use, is taught too (10%). In addition, two teachers mentioned that they teach CanE (2%) and SAE (2%). However, it did not come up in the teachers’ answers whether the teaching includes production of the different varieties or only listening to them. It is likely that the teachers have understood the question differently.

Table 9: Question 12. Which pronunciation models you teach to your students?

Majority of the teachers aim at consistency in their pronunciation (79%) (see Table 10 below).

However, when asked if they guided their students to consistency when choosing a pronunciation model, the number of “yes” answers was reduced to 40% (see Table 11 below).

Vice versa the amount of those teachers who stated that they do not aim at consistency (21%) was tripled (60%) when the consistency concerned their students.

75%

92%

10%

2%

2%

15%

13%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

American English British English Australian English Canadian English South African English International English Other

Pronunciation models taught

Table 10: Question 10. Do you aim at consistency in your pronunciation?

n percent

Yes 41 78.85%

No 11 21.15%

Table 11: Question 13: Do you guide your students into consistency when choosing a pronunciation model?

n percent

Yes 21 40.38%

No 31 59.62%

It seems that not all teachers guide their students into consistency even though they themselves aim at it. These results might be due to the education the teachers have received. The demand of using only one model, either the British or American pronunciation, may have been stricter before the EIL era. Not guiding their students into consistency when choosing a pronunciation model might suggest a subtle movement in the teachers’ thinking towards EIL pedagogy, where focus lies in intelligibility instead of learning a standard pronunciation (Sharifian 2013: 9).

However, as observed above, similarly to the textbooks, also teaching is dominated by the British and American pronunciation models with some glimpses of other models.

Rally English

Regardless of the more accepting views towards the different varieties of English, not all teachers accept any type of attempt to speak English: seven teachers explicitly mentioned that they cannot stand the Finnish “rally” accent (rally English is English that is affected by the Finnish language and has gotten its name from the Finnish rally drivers speaking with a heavy Finnish accent) or hiding behind it, and in their view, students should avoid speaking with a heavy Finnish accent. These teachers thought that even trying to produce the right sounds is better than playing it safe and purposely using rally English (see examples 32-33).

Example 32:

Rallienglanti pois! Oppilaat piiloutuvat usein rallienglannin taakse, mutta yritän opettaa heidät pois siitä.

No rally English! Students often hide behind rally English, but I try to teach them off of it.

Example 33:

Moni puhuu tahallaan "rallienglantia" kun ei uskalleta ääntää kunnolla epäonnistumisen pelossa.

Many speak rally English on purpose, because they are afraid of pronouncing properly due to the fear of failing.

The teachers in the present study did not state explicitly why rally English is not suitable, but as Wang (2015) pointed out, varieties with heavy influence from speaker’s L1 may not be seen as suitable for pedagogical models because of native speaker ideologies or a certain stigma.

However, on the contrary, some teachers stated that they encourage students to speak even with a rally accent, because in their view it is better than not speaking at all and as one teacher wrote

“there is no need to try to mimic a native accent as long as something comes out of the student’s mouth” (see examples 34-35).

Only one teacher mentioned explicitly that in their school it is an ideal for students to achieve native-like skills in pronunciation, but nevertheless she continued that “the most important thing is for a student to be able to consider his or her accent as valuable as any other accent”. This view is in line with Smith’s (1976) arguments on that English should be used by each nation in their own right “…with different tone, color, and quality.” (Smith 1976: 39) and that there is no need to try to mimic native speakers.

Example 34:

Olen alkanut kannustaa suomalaiseen rallienglantiin, koska toivon sen rohkaisevan oppilaita aloittamaan puhumisen.

I have started to encourage students to speak Finnish rally English, because I hope it encourages them to start speaking.

Example 35:

Ensinnäkin rohkaisen niitä puhumaan, jotka häpeävät ralliääntämystään -kaikilla on aksentti! Toiseksi yritän aina löytää kuunneltavaksi eurooppalaisia ja ei-amerikkalaisia puhujia.

First of all, I encourage those to speak who are ashamed of their rally pronunciation -everyone has an accent! Secondly, I always try to find non-European and non-American speakers to listen to.

The most beneficial solution for the students’ progress as legitimate language users might be in-between these two approaches, because as Pennington and Rogerson-Revell (2018: 134) have pointed out, teachers should concentrate on guiding the students into thinking that intelligibility and fluency can be reached despite the accent instead of trying to assure them about the unimportance of a native-like accent.

Overall, teachers seem to appreciate the bravery to speak. However, differences of opinion arise when it comes to tolerance towards different accents. Some teachers require their students to try out “correct” pronunciation instead of hiding behind rally English whereas others feel that it is acceptable to speak with a heavy accent as long as something is uttered. However, what is in common in the views of these teachers with the differing opinions on the usage of rally English is the fact that they all want to encourage their students into communicating confidently regardless of the pronunciation mistakes. These views are also in line with the goals of the newest national core curriculum (LOPS 2019).